It's such a big ship! And for all I can see...No boosters, no exhausts, there's nothing on the rear!!!!
So how?!?! (This is making me crazy)
Hhheeeelllllpppp.......
Seriously...How does the Hound's Tooth fly?
A wizard did it.
Shear ugliness, that's how.
Carcassonne's Catapult...
By ejecting all the dead and skinned carcasses out the back hatch.
The same way that the Falcon is able to maneuver in atmosphere despite being a platter.
The same way that the Falcon is able to maneuver in atmosphere despite being a platter.
Repulsor lifts need a gravity source to push against there's no way they work in space.
The same way that the Falcon is able to maneuver in atmosphere despite being a platter.
Repulsor lifts need a gravity source to push against there's no way they work in space.
I think he was more going for "because it looks cool and is necessary for the story".
The same way that the Falcon is able to maneuver in atmosphere despite being a platter.
Repulsor lifts need a gravity source to push against there's no way they work in space.
I think he was more going for "because it looks cool and is necessary for the story".
But there's a well explained reason for why ties and non aerodynamic ships work in atmo.
The same way that the Falcon is able to maneuver in atmosphere despite being a platter.
Repulsor lifts need a gravity source to push against there's no way they work in space.
I think he was more going for "because it looks cool and is necessary for the story".
But there's a well explained reason for why ties and non aerodynamic ships work in atmo.
So long as you're in a solar system there's gravity to push off of. And Hyperspace travel doesn't seem to need an engine.
(Beyond that, there are a lot of ways to make things move without jetting fire out their back end. And it has engines. They're oddly placed between the fins
But they are there.
My point is that science has a lot of different ways to handle things.
There appears to be an upgrade called "Maneuvering Fins" so I've just been assuming it flaps those REALLY hard.
When you put inertia dampeners in reverse they create inertia and then sir Issac Newton takes the stick.
BECAUSE REASONS!
Seems that all Starwars ships are equipped with some sort of anti-grav technology, used primarily on landings-take offs and to assist in atmospheric (gravity) flying.
Also, in space they don't use conventional (and primitive) jet thrusters to maneuver, but a more advanced technology, probably a variation if not the same anti-grav tech.
Or you can just simply stop trying to explain things by the contemporary and conventional technical knowledge you have, or else, you may sound like a troglodyte trying to explain how a computer works.
When you put inertia dampeners in reverse they create inertia and then sir Issac Newton takes the stick.
Except when you use that new NASA engine...
Because there's just zero gravity in space... And once you stop applying energy you stop moving in a vacuum.The same way that the Falcon is able to maneuver in atmosphere despite being a platter.
Repulsor lifts need a gravity source to push against there's no way they work in space.
I think he was more going for "because it looks cool and is necessary for the story".
But there's a well explained reason for why ties and non aerodynamic ships work in atmo.
So long as you're in a solar system there's gravity to push off of. And Hyperspace travel doesn't seem to need an engine.
(Beyond that, there are a lot of ways to make things move without jetting fire out their back end. And it has engines. They're oddly placed between the fins
But they are there.
My point is that science has a lot of different ways to handle things.
I assume that was a typo, if you stop applying energy in a vacuum then you will continue moving at the same speed and course that you were moving before cutting thrust.
So unless you encounter a gravitational force there is nothing to stop you move in space.
But we all knew that yeah....
Same way the tie fighter hovers in the episode VII preview, Star Wars is more fantasy than science, same as the light saber
Hahaha that guy
When you put inertia dampeners in reverse they create inertia and then sir Issac Newton takes the stick.
Except when you use that new NASA engine...
I was just reading about that the other day as well.
When you put inertia dampeners in reverse they create inertia and then sir Issac Newton takes the stick.
Except when you use that new NASA engine...
I was just reading about that the other day as well.
???
When you put inertia dampeners in reverse they create inertia and then sir Issac Newton takes the stick.
Except when you use that new NASA engine...
I was just reading about that the other day as well.
???When you put inertia dampeners in reverse they create inertia and then sir Issac Newton takes the stick.
Except when you use that new NASA engine...
I was just reading about that the other day as well.
The EmDrive
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EmDrive
It looks like total bunk and tin foil hat science, except a couple of independent labs have been getting intriguing, repeatable results recently so it made a small splash on the newsfeeds the past couple days.
???When you put inertia dampeners in reverse they create inertia and then sir Issac Newton takes the stick.
Except when you use that new NASA engine...
I was just reading about that the other day as well.
The EmDrivehttp://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EmDrive
It looks like total bunk and tin foil hat science, except a couple of independent labs have been getting intriguing, repeatable results recently so it made a small splash on the newsfeeds the past couple days.
???
When you put inertia dampeners in reverse they create inertia and then sir Issac Newton takes the stick.
Except when you use that new NASA engine...
I was just reading about that the other day as well.
The EmDrive
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EmDrive
It looks like total bunk and tin foil hat science, except a couple of independent labs have been getting intriguing, repeatable results recently so it made a small splash on the newsfeeds the past couple days.